Originally Posted by
Grand58742
Realistically, an ADCS anomaly leading to loss of good insertion timing isn't that terrible an error in terms of design capability, and this is why you test by flying instead of testing on a computer.
It does show that their trajectory setup is inherently safe, and they're getting a free shakedown of their contingency landing systems.
The answer to your question is that comparing everything into a documentation driven contract to a capability driven venture project, you find that all the legacy procedure-driven stuff and cost of updating old ideas ends up getting outran the agility of just making new ideas work and being willing to fail (vice trying to maintain things like the amazing record of the Centaur upper stage)... flight legacy is only helpful to a point, and in many regards NASA is pushing them towards that.
عندما تصبح الأسلحة محظورة, قد يملكون حظرون عندهم فقط
کله چی سلاح منع شوی دی، یوازي غلوونکۍ یی به درلود
Semper Fi
"Being able to do the basics, on demand, takes practice. " - Sinister
Bookmarks